Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Grant Guidelines topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board refines language for 'What's New for 2026' grant guidance
Summary
The board reviewed draft 2026 guidance and proposed softening language that implied completion reports would determine funding; members also discussed adding typical award ranges to the guidelines so applicants have realistic expectations.
Board chair Ralph Roughton opened discussion of the 'What's New for 2026' draft and invited comments about a sentence that read, in draft, that the quality of completion reports "will influence" future awards. Members recommended softening the claim to avoid overstating criteria. As one member said, changing "will influence" to "could influence" would "deescalate the strength of the sentence."
Members also debated how much fiscal guidance to give applicants. Several board members recommended including a typical award range to help first-time applicants. One board member said the average awarded amount in recent cycles was roughly $4,500, though the board has funded requests up to about $15,000 in prior years. The board agreed it would be helpful to note a typical range while clarifying it is not a strict cap.
Why it matters: Clear applicant guidance can reduce inappropriate or unrealistic requests and make review more efficient. The board agreed to revise wording, remove the phrase "rest assured," change the strength of claims about report effects on awards, and place ranges within the guidelines (not the FAQs). The board expects to present a finished draft at the next meeting on September 25.
